If they do sell the D&D intellectual property, most likely it will be to the highest bidder.

At the present time, I don't know if Paizo or anybody else in the tabletop rpg business, has the deep pockets for such a big purchase.

In principle, the highest bidder could be somebody outside of the tabletop rpg business, such as an MMORPG company (ie. Blizzard, etc ...). For example back in 2006, the MMO company CCP Games bought up the tabletop rpg company White Wolf.

4E hasn't failed; its still an improvement over 3.5andRevenge of Spellcaster Edition, I mean Pathfinder.

Essentials, however, just might kill it.

Those who keep quoting the EULA at our complaints should live in shame for their reprehensible behavior, as should WotC. Nicolae Ceauşescu never committed acts as reprehensible as the last few weeks here.

I like both 4e and Pathfinder, and I have yet to see any objective data to prove that either is doing poorly. The most favorable estimate of Pathfinder still only had it tied with 4e sales. And, it seems like all evidence based on objective sales data says that D&D is still, by and large, outselling Pathfinder.

Oh, and I pray to god Paizo never has anything to do with D&D beyond picking up its leftovers and trying to resell them. Pathfinder is the worst piece of crap I have seen in a LONG time.

Same here. There is no way WotC is failing that badly, and Pathfinder is of questionable quality at best.

If you really want 3e done right, go with Fantasy Craft, which rips out all the crap from 3e that Pathfinder failed to do, and added in a lot of other cool features. Of course, it's also way more rules intensive ...

I won't comment on the quality of the Pathfinder mechanics (I know a lot of people who loves playing Pathfinder because they loved playing 3.5; I just don't feel Pathfinder improved 3.5 in any shape or form).

However, from any perspective you look at it, Pathfinder is, in terms of creativity and intellectual honesty and commercial ethics, one of the most disgusting events in the history of tabletop gaming. Competing against a company by reselling their own products, and more importantly suffocating the market share that could have gone to much more deserving competitors who are actually doing something new on their own, is absolutely and unquestionably the textbook definition of lameness.

I think WoTC will still be behind 5e, DDI may however, be dead or viewed to be unprofitable.

DDI has generally been a failure, that also likely hurt 4e's sales due to the CB, and the lack of tools. DDI is effectively back where it was when the CB was launched, as the monster builder is buggy (and I still cant update after letting it download for 3 days) and all their recent dev time has gone into a new CB to replace the old with less features in some attempt to reclaim the loss in sales due to the original CB.

This is in addition to the common view on these forums that the magazine quality is declining (even its fluff is dryer than before).

That said, 5e might revitalize DDI because it they can release a whole lot of support easily again. However, with the new online CB, i wouldnt be surprised if it abandons 4e when it rolls around and create another debacle. Atleast with the offline one those who 'stay behind' in 4e, or simply wish to finish their campaigns before converting wouldnt have been screwed.

I think 5e will likely be WoTC's last D&D though, as 4e doesnt seem to be doing as well as hoped, as shown by the radical change, which seems to be further alienating customer groups. Thats not saying the changes wont bring new people, but the net gain likely won't be too extensive. This will likely cause 5e to have a lower dev budget and try more things that will likely continue to annoy its userbase. The good news for 5e is atleast the GSL prevents someone from making a '4e pathfinder' like game.

Ggroy may be correct, that someone not currently in the RPG market might buy the IP.

The problem with that assessment is that there not only isn't a potential buyer of the magnitude of Hasbro/WotC, but there isn't a seller either. This isn't a licensed product, it is owned SOLELY by Hasbro, and they don't sell of stuff very often. If they will do anything with it if it is failing (and it is not, by all accounts), is cease production on it for a few years, let the market regenerate, then go from there.

The money that would be made by selling D&D off would be short term profit. The heads of a company the likes of Hasbro aren't dumb enough to throw it away for chump change. Even if Paizo was selling Pathfinder at a 100% profit for a period of several years, they wouldn't even come close to the capital Hasbro would want for it.

Ggroy may be correct, that someone not currently in the RPG market might buy the IP.

The problem with that assessment is that there not only isn't a potential buyer of the magnitude of Hasbro/WotC, but there isn't a seller either. This isn't a licensed product, it is owned SOLELY by Hasbro, and they don't sell of stuff very often. If they will do anything with it if it is failing (and it is not, by all accounts), is cease production on it for a few years, let the market regenerate, then go from there.

The money that would be made by selling D&D off would be short term profit. The heads of a company the likes of Hasbro aren't dumb enough to throw it away for chump change. Even if Paizo was selling Pathfinder at a 100% profit for a period of several years, they wouldn't even come close to the capital Hasbro would want for it.

I think from a strictly business perspective, D&D is kind of an odd fit for Hasbro. It's not a toy line, it's a book line with some peripheral products attached.

As far as I can tell, Hasbro originally bought WotC to get its hands on M:tG. D&D isn't core to what they do, which is selling collectibles and toys to families and kids. I'm sure they appreciate D&D as a steady (if unspectacular) revenue stream, but doubt they have much interest in it beyond that.

Companies often 'refocus' during hard times by selling off parts of their business that they have acquired that are not part of their core focus. Assuming Hasbro was in a cash crunch, D&D would be just the kind of thing they would be looking to dump, moderately profitable or not.

This is all purely speculative, as far as I know Hasbro is doing okay thanks to a steady stream of Hollywood movie tie-ins courtesy of one Michael Bay.

The only statistic Iv read was before Essentials and from an article that didnt specify its source. IIRC it said: There are more D&D players than ever before, and there are more players playing 4e than any other edition put together.

It seems D&D 4e is doing well enough.

I suspect, WotC created Essentials because ...• WotC wanted to steal customers from Pathfinder: old school grognards whor reliable customers.• Certain designers have nostalgia, and its a personal artistic expression.• Digital 4e evolves: WotC needed to reformat current rules without obsoleting the books so far.• WotC wanted an 'essential' entry point that is 'evergreen' and immune to digital evolution. (Good luck with that.)

D&D 4e Core is doing well. Essentials seems to be doing well. The future will support both Core and Essentials. The Christmas retail season just started with Halloween, and will only get better.

I think WotC look at things like the success of WoW, the persistence of Pathfinder, even the tough economy in which a large corporation has an advantage over smaller efforts, and feel they want to do better in the marketplace.

A lot of people commenting on this just don't understand how mega-corporations work. 4e is doing okay and is still outselling Pathfinder. The problem is that Hasbro wants more and more profit. That's what mega-corps are all about; do whatever it takes to boost shareholder return. RPG's are a marginal profit item. Essentials was probably ordered to act as a quick sales boost before 5e is released in 2012-2013.

With regards to D&D being sold to Paizo or anyone else, I think the odds of that are pretty slim. D&D brings a well known brand name to Hasbro's stable. Look at all the cross-marketing currently underway... novels, comic books (soon to be graphic novels), board games, and computer games. You KNOW Hasbro is working on a line of ties, probably tied to another cartoon show and/or feature length movie. Yes, the last D&D movie was an abomination but if Batman has taught us anything, fans are always willing to at least give reboot movies a try.

In short, the RPG is probably a small part of Hasbro's plan for D&D. Sell it to Paizo? not a chance.

If you look at Hasbro's past actions they tend to stop producing under-performing lines of toys and games, and just hold onto them (often for long periods of time) in order to create a little anticipation for their re-release/ return at some later date. As an example, they have "pulled the plug" on the G.I. Joe line- their flagship property, and the toy that both launched the action figure industry and put Hasbro on the map almost 50 years ago- twice. The first time it returned soon after as the microman-inspired line popular through the '80s, and the second time it was out of production for YEARS. I see no reason to expect D&D to fare any better under their control. Given the name recognition of Dungeons & Dragons and the loyalty of it's fan-base Hasbro would have to be in truly dire straits to ever consider letting it go, and so far as I can tell there is no reason to think that is going to happen any time soon. As for the specific success of D&D, I think we'll need to see what happens this Christmas season before we know for sure how it is doing. I saw the new "red box" at a Wal-Mart the other day, and that has the potential to make it the most widely distributed release in the games history!

I'm going to hold on to this thread and bump it twice: once on Jan 1st 2012, and once on Dec 31st, 2012. Assuming the Mayans weren't right, we'll have a good laugh, especially when it hovers above the "Paizo files for Bankruptcy, nobody wants Pathfinder" news thread.

"Ah, the age-old conundrum. Defenders of a game are too blind to see it's broken, and critics are too idiotic to see that it isn't." - Brian McCormick

My group and i switched to 4e from 3.5. We loved 4e for the first year, but after a time and several characters, we felt the game was bland. My players complained to me that they felt every class was essentially the same, with maybe a peanut chip instead of a chocolate chip.

So we took a break from 4e and I was invited to play Pathfinder. It was a lot of fun, and the classes were different enough to be fun to play. I introduced my group to Pathfinder and they loved it enough to give it a chance. We have been playing Pathfinder now for well over a year.

Then the word came down about essentials. My players are skeptical, but I am as excited about essentials as I was about the orginal 4e. I started playing with 2e, and I have run every edition of the game (yup, even ran a fighting man once).

I say that the essentials lines feel to me like the older editions, and i believe it will do well.

I do not think Paizo even wants D&D, because they are doing fine with Pathfinder, and even if my group and I decide to get back into 4e via essentials (which I plan to spring on them via shock and awe much like my d20 pokkyclyse camapign a few years back, mwa ha ha) we will still run Pathfinder as a different rule set.

Just like when we used to run Star Wars d6 and Ad&d 2nd. it breaks up the monotony.

As far as Hasbro is concerned, i doubt they will ever sell of D&D. It has moved beyond a mere rpg and has joined with the collective consciousness of the planet earth. Ask anyone on the street, and 90% will be able to tell you something about Dungeons & Dragons.

I think they only made Pathfinder because they saw enough disinterest in 4th and figured they would milk that market some more.

No, I don't think so. Paizo was already busy producing adventures and their own setting material after their contract for publishing Dungeon and Dragon expired. The announcement of 4e - which wasn't hard to foresee - made it clear that they either had to follow the leader and adopt 4e as their system of choice or travel down a different route. It was actually WotC's negligence with the writing of the GSL which forced Paizo as a company with a very busy publishing schedule to act. Instead of risking to wait for 4e and the GSL, Mrs. Stevens decided to make their own 3.5e spin-off. They had to do it because they need the rulebooks in print, and it was clear that WotC would stop distributing 3.5 books with the advent of 4e.

Paizo is to me, just another Paladium. They are still out there regardless of how much fate has tried to kill them. I know plenty of people still happy to by Kevin's books.

They're still out their because they found their own target group. While this group is probably nothing compared to WotC's, it should be big enough to sustain Paizo. They will face tough times when part of the loyal fanboys who promote Paizo today will turn into vocal haters some years down the road.

I don't think Paizo is in any specific hurry to do 5th edition.

No, of cause not. I expect them to move somewhat away from their origin at WotC's bosom. There are probably a lot of people thinking about them as you seem to do. Convincing these group to buy Paizo stuff would need products which don't feel like D&D-like products.

Wizards has made some ham-fisted moves of late. The handeling of the Gamma World Game Day required a combined buy in of at least 80 dollars between a DM and four players, and the handeling of the recent changes to the character builder leave a lot to be desired.

Many people enjoy the current builder feel a little nervous about storing their characters "in the cloud" rather than on their own hard drive.

However, I have no complaints about the way fourth edition plays. A less ambitious publishing schedule would be worth it if Wizards focused on quality over quantity.

Wizards needs to turn a profit, which is undestandable, and I would rather not see Paizo take over the D&D intellectual property. However, it would be nice if Wizards made a few less bizarre decisions.

This isn't the first time a game company has gone through an odd period. Take a look at some of the products TSR put out during their time.

4th edition was doomed at the start. From the first day of "We are going have all these things ready to go on LAUNCH DAY, then barely anything.

The books were haphazardly put together, so much that we now have over 100 pages of errors and corrections (aka errata). Proofreading, ever hear of it? Every single mistake, every single misprint, every single inconsistency makes the company look unprofessional. Couple that with the constant lies and the "soon" comments, and you have the perfect making for people to burn their D&D books in the middle of the street.

But perhaps, thats Hasbro's game all along eh? If WotC was indeed was bought for M:TG, then why take D&D at all? Personally, I think Hasbro should let D&D the hell alone. Give D&D back to the TRUE gamers.

Take the Wizard class for instance - how many "Wizards" does this flippin game need? We have the wizard, the sorcerer, the warlock, the mage and coming soon the necromancer (unless they screw this one up as well - which they will). Take the basic concept of the wizard that has always been. He was a book loving, studious, Merlin type. He was almost impossible to keep alive and in that THAT was the challenge. But they split all the powers up into multiple classes that do little more than act as 5 uneven, repetitive splits that do nothing but step on each other's toes.

This game needs exactly 4 classes - The fighter to wear the heavy armor and use large weapons, the wizard to stand near the back and blast the crap out of the bad guys, the cleric to heal and inspire his comrades, and the rogue to steal the DMs wallet - THAT'S IT

All of the these other 26+ classes are unnecessary. You want a druid, put him in the cleric book. You want a ranger, put him in the fighter book. All of the "specialist" wizards go in the wizard book, and the bard and assassin types go in the rogue book. I mean how flipping hard is it.

The game has always had a classical feel to it, up until now. There are so many inconsistencies with things that are just crap and don't make sense.

It's simple: the classes should be fighter, wizard, cleric, rogue. The races should be human, elf, dwarf, halfling. Done - Now take that wizards - free of charge AND FIX THE GAME

4e failed, Essentials won't save it. Hasbro will cut it's losses, and sell the IP to the one company still making a profit off D&D.

Discuss.

It'll never happen. Erik Mona has said that some fans apparently have to have a highly distrorted view of the scale of Paizo vs WotC and that seems to be what you're displaying here. He has openly said that Pathfinder does well within its niche market but that the market share that WotC's DnD holds dwarfs Pathfinder by orders of magnitude.

Take it directly from the higher-ups at Paizo: they simply aren't big enough to take on WotC's DnD.

4th edition was doomed at the start. From the first day of "We are going have all these things ready to go on LAUNCH DAY, then barely anything.

The books were haphazardly put together, so much that we now have over 100 pages of errors and corrections (aka errata). Proofreading, ever hear of it? Every single mistake, every single misprint, every single inconsistency makes the company look unprofessional. Couple that with the constant lies and the "soon" comments, and you have the perfect making for people to burn their D&D books in the middle of the street.

But perhaps, thats Hasbro's game all along eh? If WotC was indeed was bought for M:TG, then why take D&D at all? Personally, I think Hasbro should let D&D the hell alone. Give D&D back to the TRUE gamers.

Take the Wizard class for instance - how many "Wizards" does this flippin game need? We have the wizard, the sorcerer, the warlock, the mage and coming soon the necromancer (unless they screw this one up as well - which they will). Take the basic concept of the wizard that has always been. He was a book loving, studious, Merlin type. He was almost impossible to keep alive and in that THAT was the challenge. But they split all the powers up into multiple classes that do little more than act as 5 uneven, repetitive splits that do nothing but step on each other's toes.

This game needs exactly 4 classes - The fighter to wear the heavy armor and use large weapons, the wizard to stand near the back and blast the crap out of the bad guys, the cleric to heal and inspire his comrades, and the rogue to steal the DMs wallet - THAT'S IT

All of the these other 26+ classes are unnecessary. You want a druid, put him in the cleric book. You want a ranger, put him in the fighter book. All of the "specialist" wizards go in the wizard book, and the bard and assassin types go in the rogue book. I mean how flipping hard is it.

The game has always had a classical feel to it, up until now. There are so many inconsistencies with things that are just crap and don't make sense.

It's simple: the classes should be fighter, wizard, cleric, rogue. The races should be human, elf, dwarf, halfling. Done - Now take that wizards - free of charge AND FIX THE GAME

"This game needs exactly 4 classes - The fighter to wear the heavy armor and use large weapons, the wizard to stand near the back and blast the crap out of the bad guys, the cleric to heal and inspire his comrades, and the rogue to steal the DMs wallet - THAT'S IT"

It is clear some do NOT agree with you, but then some DO.

I've always felt that the more they give us in spelled out detail, the more they take away from us being ROLE gamers.

I'd rather Wizards was about pulishing for the only guy that NEEDS to buy %#%#@$ books, the DM.

Players shouldn't need to buy books much at all.

A player should be able to show up with pencil paper eraser and their own funny shaped dice at the most. 4th edition, has become quite the marketing spectacle indeed.

There's a reason I have tight limits on what I will permit at the table. I can't carry those books around even if I didn't mind paying out a fortune to get them.And what player likes joining a game and then realizing they need to start shelling out a fortune in books?

All the races they have made available, maybe that would be a good thing to put in the DMG actually. A better method of turning an odd race into a PC. Instead of cramming many Player's books with many fancy races, that really could have been done more efficiently.

But theres no money in efficiency eh.Which is why I don't mind Wizards being about making money (it's a business eh), but forget my being nice about it. They're in this for your money. You're nothing but a wallet to them.I think at least Gary was in it for the game.

I don't think WotC is going for sell...at least not for a few years and LOT more downturn. Perhaps if it is to sell, the name brand can be sold, but the brands themselves (D&D, AH, Magic...etc.) stay with WotC. They can keep dreamblade...

Or, if they want to invest in a single property...a couple hundred million for Alternity?

Make a good enough offer, there might even be discussions on the brand name of AD&D? or if it's an outstanding stellar offer...even D&D...

But, strangely enough (or not) I'm thinking that Paizo probably doesn't have that kind of money. For out of print stuff, they MAY make a good enough deal on the cheap (some of the smaller games, such as OOP boardgames that may never see the light of day again) they might though...but I don't think Paizo want's to be going into that business quite yet.

I could live with D&D under Paizo control (I think). They seem like a good company, doing good things with Pathfinder (which I don't play but it looks solid). I wouldn't want to go back to the last edition though, I'd rather move forward to the next edition.

For the most part, D&D edition change is an exciting time for me. No reason for me to expect any different under Paizo. TSR did okay, so does WotC I think

=== === ===

Anyway, here's what I posted for ;):

I like both 4e and Pathfinder, and I have yet to see any objective data to prove that either is doing poorly. The most favorable estimate of Pathfinder still only had it tied with 4e sales. And, it seems like all evidence based on objective sales data says that D&D is still, by and large, outselling Pathfinder.

Oh, and I pray to god Paizo never has anything to do with D&D beyond picking up its leftovers and trying to resell them. Pathfinder is the worst piece of crap I have seen in a LONG time.

4th edition was doomed at the start. From the first day of "We are going have all these things ready to go on LAUNCH DAY, then barely anything.

The books were haphazardly put together, so much that we now have over 100 pages of errors and corrections (aka errata). Proofreading, ever hear of it? Every single mistake, every single misprint, every single inconsistency makes the company look unprofessional. Couple that with the constant lies and the "soon" comments, and you have the perfect making for people to burn their D&D books in the middle of the street.

But perhaps, thats Hasbro's game all along eh? If WotC was indeed was bought for M:TG, then why take D&D at all? Personally, I think Hasbro should let D&D the hell alone. Give D&D back to the TRUE gamers.

Take the Wizard class for instance - how many "Wizards" does this flippin game need? We have the wizard, the sorcerer, the warlock, the mage and coming soon the necromancer (unless they screw this one up as well - which they will). Take the basic concept of the wizard that has always been. He was a book loving, studious, Merlin type. He was almost impossible to keep alive and in that THAT was the challenge. But they split all the powers up into multiple classes that do little more than act as 5 uneven, repetitive splits that do nothing but step on each other's toes.

This game needs exactly 4 classes - The fighter to wear the heavy armor and use large weapons, the wizard to stand near the back and blast the crap out of the bad guys, the cleric to heal and inspire his comrades, and the rogue to steal the DMs wallet - THAT'S IT

All of the these other 26+ classes are unnecessary. You want a druid, put him in the cleric book. You want a ranger, put him in the fighter book. All of the "specialist" wizards go in the wizard book, and the bard and assassin types go in the rogue book. I mean how flipping hard is it.

The game has always had a classical feel to it, up until now. There are so many inconsistencies with things that are just crap and don't make sense.

It's simple: the classes should be fighter, wizard, cleric, rogue. The races should be human, elf, dwarf, halfling. Done - Now take that wizards - free of charge AND FIX THE GAME

No.

Disney will buy the DnD brand name. Like Disnaey bought the Marvel brand name and intelectual property. Because Disney needs content to make toys and movies with.

If Hasbro were to sell D&D this would be the most likely scenario. Of course, then a dire rat would probably be shown to wear red shorts...

I like both 4e and Pathfinder, and I have yet to see any objective data to prove that either is doing poorly. The most favorable estimate of Pathfinder still only had it tied with 4e sales. And, it seems like all evidence based on objective sales data says that D&D is still, by and large, outselling Pathfinder.

Oh, and I pray to god Paizo never has anything to do with D&D beyond picking up its leftovers and trying to resell them. Pathfinder is the worst piece of crap I have seen in a LONG time.

Okay, what did I miss? You're contradicting yourself here. No ;)?

/\ Art

I think the better question is, what did I miss? I certainly do not like Pathfinder. I have no idea how that first bolded line got in there. I don't know if I was quoting someone and forgot to type the quote tags, or if I was low on sleep and I mistyped that first line, or what. I don't even remember making that post...

I like both 4e and Pathfinder, and I have yet to see any objective data to prove that either is doing poorly. The most favorable estimate of Pathfinder still only had it tied with 4e sales. And, it seems like all evidence based on objective sales data says that D&D is still, by and large, outselling Pathfinder.

Oh, and I pray to god Paizo never has anything to do with D&D beyond picking up its leftovers and trying to resell them. Pathfinder is the worst piece of crap I have seen in a LONG time.

Okay, what did I miss? You're contradicting yourself here. No ;)?

/\ Art

I think the better question is, what did I miss? I certainly do not like Pathfinder. I have no idea how that first bolded line got in there. I don't know if I was quoting someone and forgot to type the quote tags, or if I was low on sleep and I mistyped that first line, or what. I don't even remember making that post...

I love this political tactic of equating: "I don't like this thing," with: "This thing is failing miserably because no one likes it." But if you want to have your little D&D Tea Party, then go ahead. I'm comfortable knowing you are just part of a vocal minority going through the normal death throes associated with realizing you've become out of touch with normal society. It's always darkest before dawn, and the echoes of your frantic Chicken Little cries will eventually cease and one day be forgotten.

I am Gazra. This is my DDI account. Gazra is my forum account. Sometimes I get lazy and post with this account.

What's probably happening is they'll watch the essentials sales figures for the next 6 months, if there good, okay, if they're disappointing then it'll be 5e it time for Christmas 2012.

However, if they keep to the current business model, you won't know they're going to can 4e until after they've just sold you a couple of expensive books that you won't be able to use in 3 months time.

I don't like essentials, so I'm not buying or using them.

I really disliked they way they obfuscated they change in the character builder to online, so It's a big part on me requesting they cancel my subscription and refund me.

Those of you who like it here and now, enjoy yourselves whilst it lasts.

I'm going to hold on to this thread and bump it twice: once on Jan 1st 2012, and once on Dec 31st, 2012. Assuming the Mayans weren't right, we'll have a good laugh, especially when it hovers above the "Paizo files for Bankruptcy, nobody wants Pathfinder" news thread.

If piazo buys D&D it will be the end of the game as we know it I hate the pathfinder system as it is too much like 3.5. They did fix some od the issues with 3.5 uin pathfinder but all in all still very broken.

Those who keep quoting the EULA at our complaints should live in shame for their reprehensible behavior, as should WotC. Nicolae Ceauşescu never committed acts as reprehensible as the last few weeks here.